Archives

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Place requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

December to Dismember (2006) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-Protection (1-day) - On main page - IP vandalism. According to the log, it's already protected, but it clearly isn't as IP's are still editing it. D.M.N. (talk) 10:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rudget. 11:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

21 (2008 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary full protection Dispute, Dispute over content has developed into edit war among some users (both anon and registered). The issue is sensitive as it deals with allegations of racism in the subject film..Taroaldo (talk) 09:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already protected by administrator by AGK.. Rudget. 11:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Noadminbacklog (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

full protection High-visible template, Transcluded on a large number of pages.— scetoaux (T/C) 06:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Nalli (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary full protection Vandalism, Persistant vandalism by user:notimpressed and user:unimpressed and user:assmaster5000. In the case of the first two users, these are strongly presumed to be the same person who is known to be undertaking a personal smear campaign for which he has been repremanded by administrators of other Internet forums. Legal action is being considered. Avsafety (talk) 06:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected — per WP:BLP concerns. —Dark ^talk 08:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Seacrest (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection from mutiple, daily, anonymous vandalism. Vandalism has required constant daily revisions for quite some time now.Roswell native (talk) 05:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 06:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pedophilia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Recent vandalism today from multiple IPs..— scetoaux (T/C) 05:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 months, next time it will probably need to be indef. Tiptoety ^talk 05:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea Clinton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect Vandalism, Persistent vandalism. Anastrophe (talk) 05:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Margarita Catholic High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Student revisions, including vandalism and non-encyclopedic additions. JNW (talk) 05:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. There are two recemnt problematic users - one is blocked, deal with the other one in stead of the page. If there's more problematic users editing the page, consider relisting here. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich Martens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent anonymous IP hopping editor keeps removing sourced text and inserting unsupported claims for the last few weeks, despite being asked to provide such sources previously. Martintg (talk) 02:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. JNW (talk) 02:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected indefinitely. Oddly, I'd have expected more vandalism on such an article :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mona Lisa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protect. High level of IP vandalism. JNW (talk) 02:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 month, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.

• To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
• Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
• Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
• If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.

Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.

List of billionaires (2008) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

unprotection , Surge of vandalism that occured on 27 March was probably an exception, and I think it's safe to try unprotecting for the time being.PeterSymonds | talk 22:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DZUR (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

unprotect. There is nothing wrong in this article and it is time to unprotect this article right now. Radiosmasher (talk) 12:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't there an ANI thread about Phillipine radio stations fairly recently? If so, protection may have to remain in place per that discussion. Rudget. 12:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was an ANI thread about Phillipine radio stations, except for DZUR. Radiosmasher (talk) 12:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.

• Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among {{Edit protected}}, {{Edit template-protected}}, {{Edit extended-protected}}, or {{Edit semi-protected}} to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed.
• Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the {{Edit COI}} template should be used.
• Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
• If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
• This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.

User:RachelMarsden (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Tag it for G10 (or at the least, MFD) Consensus is that it's more vitriolic than most stuff. Sceptre ^(talk) 17:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already unprotected.. Hut 8.5 18:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RAID (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

unprotection , The article's introduction was re-written (weeks ago!) to encompass both definitions of 'RAID' so there's no need for the protection anymore. I asked the admin to unprotect a few weeks ago but have heard nothing. The whole issue was quite trivial, really! --- Soulhunter123 (talk) 17:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected Should never have been protected indefinitely to begin with, a week would have done. Stifle (talk) 19:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Joplin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection . Article has a long history of IP vandalism. Earlier this month it was semi-protected for one week, and that helped a lot. Since semi-protection was lifted, the problem has returned, with about one revert needed per day. Stepheng3 (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 days. Tiptoety ^talk 02:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. It didn't seem too heavy to me, but wasn't being reverted quickly at all. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, on was on the edge about not protecting. Hopefully this will help. Tiptoety ^talk 02:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Janet Jackson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection . Article is being attacked over the last 20 minutes. Suggest 2-3 days protection. --Realist2 (talk) 00:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 4 days. Tiptoety ^talk 00:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gaia Online (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Insane amounts of vandalism to this page today. Marlith (Talk)  00:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 weeks due to heavy anon vandalism.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did not override this one :) (But i was close) Tiptoety ^talk 00:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cassern S. Goto (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. Persistent, months-long vandalism by what appears to be a single vandal hopping IPs; that is, same vandalism, different IPs. See [1], [2], [3], [4], et al. --Calton | Talk 23:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 1 week. Tiptoety ^talk 23:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tip you overrode the protection I already placed for 2 weeks (see here). No worries though, at least its under lock and key for the time being. That should slow this IP hippity hopper down.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

;) *blush* oops, my bad. Oh well....guess it accomplished the same thing. Oh how I hate edit conflicts. Tiptoety ^talk 23:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

St. Michael's Catholic High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi-protection. many vandals doug@dougstech.com - DougsTech.com (talk) 23:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 1 month. CIreland (talk) 23:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Son Goku (Dragon Ball) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Indefinite semi protect too much heavy vandalism and undiscussed page moves. If I was asking for too much then temporary is fine. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And can someone block ReubenMolnar (talk · contribs · logs)? Seems to be a disruption-only account. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. Tiptoety ^talk 22:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 days. Tiptoety ^talk 22:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don Murphy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary full protection Vandalism, request temp protection, consensus for changes can of course be discussed on talk. For now, I'm requesting a temporary full protect in order to deny the vandalism. Sensitive article (biography) right now...NonvocalScream (talk) 22:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fully protected due to vandalism. Cbrown1023 talk 22:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Buckley (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Requesting temporary semi-protection again due to persistent vandalism from anonymous editors to the CAD creator entry. --Muna (talk) 22:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 5 days. Tiptoety ^talk 22:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free Association of German Trade Unions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism.Tcncv (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined We do not protect articles on the mainpage except in response to extreme cases of vandalism, which is not the case here. Tiptoety ^talk 21:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Hilliard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi-protection Vandalism, Getting considerable vandalism from being linked from the banner on the main page..h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 21:07, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. This article is potentially more of a target than TFA, but also more of a target for constructive editing; new user says "Hey, I want to help make the 10Mth article better", only to find that it's been sprotected.... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Yea, I am thinking the same thing, it should be handled like a mainpage article. Tiptoety ^talk 21:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined, it's not that bad for a main page-linked article. In fact, the vandalism seems to have slowed down. Acalamari 21:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Montessori School of Westfield (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

semi-protection Vandalism, Lots of vandalism in the last hour or so, would be good if it could be semi-prot'd for a few hours till vandals get bored and go away..-- Naerii 21:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for three days. Malinaccier (talk) 21:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2009 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

indefinite semi-protection , This article was recently created and was recently announced for production. However, many IP's continue to add a "roster" list, which per discussions at Talk:WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2008, have been discouraged per WP:GAMEGUIDE. Thus, not being included in all wrestling games. Semi-Protection is the idea to go from here as this game will not be released until the Fall of 2008, which leaves more than half a year of speculation and details.TrUCo-X 20:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Stifle (talk) 22:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well this game will not be released until the fall of 2008, see I used WP:TW to Request for protection, and I think i clicked indefinite by accident. If its possible to protect it until November, which is when all WWE SvR games are released.--TrUCo-X 23:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Pugwash (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Permanent Semiprotection. Repeated IP vadalism of "Master Mate" entry. Doregan (talk) 19:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Jmlk17 19:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: And even if there was, permanent semiprotection is only contemplated for articles with endemic vandalism problems. Stifle (talk) 19:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bacon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

temporary semi protection. Frequent IP vandalism throughout March. Bazzargh (talk) 18:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for 3 weeks. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 19:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of tallest buildings and structures in the world (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi protect Frequent updates of building height and number of floors data (and consequent ordering in the list) for the Burj Dubai. The consensus at Burj Dubai is to use only the developer's official site as a source for this information. Astronaut (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of 2 weeks, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 19:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Burj Dubai (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi protect Frequent updates of building height, number of floors, current records - usually by various IP/anon editors - against the consensus to use only the developer's official site as a source for this information. Astronaut (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Jmlk17 19:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cambodia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi protect for a while, to many edits and vandals, in particular users keep adding weird information. Dwilso 17:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. Only a couple edits a day. Jmlk17 19:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Ball GT (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Semi protect until anon vandalism cools down. 17:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for 2 weeks. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 19:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WebCT (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

full protection This article has already been protected twice in the past week. In addition, RfC and Third Party Opinions have been sought and it was decided that the continual vandalism by Spellmanloves67 (talk) was innappropriate. As soon as the article was unprotected, Spellmanloves67 (talk) again added the irrelevant information. Sxbrown (talk) 02:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note - Just an opinion/comment. A content dispute/edit war isn't really vandalism though. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 02:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

However, look at the history, I would endorse a full protection on this one for sure. The user is right - spellmanloves67 has continued the disruption, using edit summaries for talking etc..etc.. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 02:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: You do not think it might be better to just warn (and if they continue block) the one user who seems to be causing the disruption? Tiptoety ^talk 04:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Hmm, very true, it's not exactly a dispute between two people, but one against consensus. In that regard, yes the user should bed warned as stated. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 14:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance. The user, Spellmanloves67 (talk) has engaged in a one-man war against anyone who disagrees with him for many months. He blanks his own talk pages as soon as he receives a warning from other Wikipedia editors which makes it difficult to keep track of his ongoing uncivil behavior towards others. Some of these blanked pages include,

March 29, 2008 Warning 2 [[5]]

March 29 2008 Warning 1 [[6]]

March 21, 2008 Warning 2 [[7]]

March 21, 2008 Warning 1 [[8]]

March 16, 2008 Warning[[9]]

December 25, 2007 Warning [[10]]

December 8, 2007 Warning [[11]]

Hopefully this ongoing struggle will end soon. Thanks again for the assistance.Sxbrown (talk) 21:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Per above. If the user in question continues to disrupt (I have already left them a warning) report them. Tiptoety ^talk 21:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]